Verdict GUILTY

a reply to: TheLead

The defense try to get a chance of venue and a continuance but the judge denied them both. His arguments were that a change in venue wouldn't really change the amount of information potential jurors already had.

The judge also pointed out that at that point the prosecution and defense had agreed on something like nine jurors pretty quickly. So if the defense actually thought the potential jurors were prejudiced, their actions in regards to jury selection weren't illustrating that belief.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Deplorable
You pass out when you're O2 drops to about 55-60%. We watched him pass out on the video.

I don't really care about the drugs in his system. Those might have been a lethal quantity.

But, what killed him was a cop on his neck named Chauvin.

So if he had 98% what was it that made him pass out? I think he passed out when his heart stopped...

As in died. Your I'll informed non qualified medical opinion counts for diddly squat.

After hearing lots of evidence from experienced relevantly qualified actual medical experts the jury did not agree with your view.
Deal with it.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: LSU2018
The reason I'm going off of intent is because that was the description given to the jurors in closing arguments. I believe your definition mentioned something along the lines of unintentional death while committing a felony. I was wondering what the felony was that Chauvin committed, if the jury had gone by that definition.

Go to 1:31:00, it clearly says 'without intent':

Whatever you thought you watched did not happen.

"intentionally applied unlawful force"
"intentional act that was dangerous to others"



And again, what felony was he committing? Assault? He was doing what he was trained to do. That was all laid out as well.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: FauxMulder
a reply to: LSU2018

Dude his knee is on his neck. So much so that his foot isn't even touching the ground.....

Eureka! You didn't watch the closing arguments.

Wasn't the whole knee on neck part moot once it was determine he didn't die to being choked out? His 02 in his blood was never below 98%, so not sure why anyone is even talking about that even though it was a very short period of time.

That's right. To those who think Chauvin pulled his foot off the ground to dig into Floyd's neck, look at the same video Augustus posted and watch from 4:46:00 to 4:49:00 to see Eric Nelson blow that nanosecond still frame shot out of the water.

a reply to: LSU2018

Re-read that again. It says the defendant took intentional actions. Not that he intended to kill. Chauvin did intentionally apply a dangerous, violent, technique that led to Floyd's death. That's the intent that's being referred to.

If Chauvin was cleaning his gun and it accidentally went off killing someone, that would not fall under murder as he was not intentionally attempting to harm another person.

a reply to: LSU2018



I even gave you the time stamp where this appeared.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: FauxMulder
a reply to: LSU2018

Dude his knee is on his neck. So much so that his foot isn't even touching the ground.....

Eureka! You didn't watch the closing arguments.

Wasn't the whole knee on neck part moot once it was determine he didn't die to being choked out? His 02 in his blood was never below 98%, so not sure why anyone is even talking about that even though it was a very short period of time.

That's right. To those who think Chauvin pulled his foot off the ground to dig into Floyd's neck, look at the same video Augustus posted and watch from 4:46:00 to 4:49:00 to see Eric Nelson blow that nanosecond still frame shot out of the water.

But he did not blow anything out of the water.

He lost. Ring any bells, eh?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: shooterbrody

I understand people will disagree with their verdict, but to pile on made up bs is disgusting.

To say there was huge amounts of influences starting the same day it happened, to having an army of people waiting to burn the city for anything less than what they did is not a hit on them. I too would have just said F it and do the same. My life, career, family etc is not worth losing to any of that no matter the reality of it all.

The jury should be selected from small towns and appear virtually for the trial from now on when the trial is as high profile as this one. Being in a small red town is more than enough to protect them so adding anonymity would be added security. Betcha a million bucks the democrats would never let that happen though. They'd use the race card to stop it.

Anonymous virtual jurors? Sounds pretty much like the Cardassian criminal justice system out of Star Trek DS9.

Really?

I'm not a Trekkie. However, for the safety of the jurors, they should now be virtually tuned in from their home instead of in the courtroom. There are too many leakers out there who would destroy a juror and the juror's family for not convicting, or for convicting.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: LSU2018

I even gave you the time stamp where this appeared.

Did you see what I posted? It has intentional in it twice. So why is there conflicting descriptions? That's a problem.

a reply to: LSU2018

And the second a panel of anonymous jurors gives a decision you don't like you'll just claim there never was any jurors and the decision was pre-decided by TPTB.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I'm not suggesting anyone did anything wrong. I'm simply saying a little thought experiment could answer the question for anyone wondering why someone might think they could be influenced. The crime and response wasn't in a vacuum, nor was the trial.

I'd have to disagree about his stance on that. Yes, it wouldn't have changed the information known, but I believe in this secenario the location may provide a different context. Obviously this trial was personal to a lot of people, but I would be hard pressed to believe it's as personal as the city that it happened.

Will you answer it?

Could it potentially influence you?

a reply to: LSU2018

There isn't. What you posted does say intentional twice but not in reference to killing Floyd. At no point in what you posted does it say or imply intent to kill.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: shooterbrody

I understand people will disagree with their verdict, but to pile on made up bs is disgusting.

To say there was huge amounts of influences starting the same day it happened, to having an army of people waiting to burn the city for anything less than what they did is not a hit on them. I too would have just said F it and do the same. My life, career, family etc is not worth losing to any of that no matter the reality of it all.

The jury should be selected from small towns and appear virtually for the trial from now on when the trial is as high profile as this one. Being in a small red town is more than enough to protect them so adding anonymity would be added security. Betcha a million bucks the democrats would never let that happen though. They'd use the race card to stop it.

Anonymous virtual jurors? Sounds pretty much like the Cardassian criminal justice system out of Star Trek DS9.

Really?

I'm not a Trekkie. However, for the safety of the jurors, they should now be virtually tuned in from their home instead of in the courtroom. There are too many leakers out there who would destroy a juror and the juror's family for not convicting, or for convicting.

So they can't see witnesses giving live evidence for real?

Utter nonsense. You'd be the first to whinge and whine if the State (TPTB) actually implemented such BS.

originally posted by: NorEaster
Stopped by to see what the ATS board had to say about all of this, and I wasn't disappointed.

I think that this society is bone tired of the belligerence and the in-your-face lies of the last 4 years, and they're hungry for a very different kind of day-to-day American experience. They're not sympathetic or even tolerant of the weird MAGA gaslight revisionism anymore, and that annoyingly predictable knee-jerk self-pity and paranoia response to every little slight has become a real turnoff. There's just so much of that ugly disingenuous crap that anyone's going to put up with, so the jury's verdict was no surprise.

For me, the worst part of it all is how irritatingly dependable this self-satisfied, tribal response to that jury verdict has been. Just tiresome as hell.

No cops are going to walk off their jobs over this. Why would they? No decent cop wants a psychopath in their ranks. No decent cop disagrees with convicting the kind of animal that could proudly and belligerently do what Chauvin did to Floyd while he watched people recording him do it; especially considering the extended length of time it took him to do it. Seriously. What kind of deranged person [cop or civilian] doesn't even bother to adjust to the situation that he's initiated after it's become as obvious to everyone there as it was that the situation itself has completely changed. Any cop that's worth the badge would've adjusted the situation as soon as it was clear that all of George's resistance had ceased, and would've placed him into the backseat and gotten on with the rest of his day. Not Chauvin, though. Not while he was still establishing his dominance over . . . over what . . . I don't know . . . perhaps his competitive urge had, by then, been redirected to the several witnesses standing in front of him as Floyd died beneath him. If so, then that's not a guy you want as your partner, and any cop could tell you that.

What was Chauvin waiting for anyway? Give me a break. His collar was already dead under his knees, and had been for over three minutes by the time he lifted off him. If the EMTs hadn't come and tapped him off, when was he going to come to the decision to progress that situation to putting Floyd in the squad car? That was easily one of the longest and most patient murders ever recorded, and that long, deliberate pacing of the act has gotta be seen as the most disturbing aspect of it.

No cop would ever want to have to depend on a soulless freak like Chauvin in a bad situation.

Chauvin was convicted by a jury of his peers, and if your partisan urgings require that you reject that verdict, then that's your own hell to navigate. It's too bad that recent tribalism pressures have sentenced so many Americans to angry, depressing prison hells that they would've otherwise avoided had the last several years played out differently.

Seconded and thank you for that.
It's reassuring to see the American judicial system, plus 12 ordinary Americans deliver what could surely have been the only reasonable verdict. It's been celebrated worldwide as the harbinger of a better, fairer and more decent future. Who knows, maybe it'll spread to ATS one day.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: vonclod

Pretty sure he does.

Well let this be a lesson learned to all cops to quit and start a different career.

That doesn't bother me one iota, if a cop quits, because he thinks Chauvin was righteous..good f'ing riddance.

I doubt much of that happens though.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

As in died. Your I'll informed non qualified medical opinion counts for diddly squat.

After hearing lots of evidence from experienced relevantly qualified actual medical experts the jury did not agree with your view.
Deal with it.

Calm down...lol The 98% came from them... You also seem to hear just what you wanted to hear...

originally posted by: vonclod
That doesn't bother me one iota, if a cop quits, because he thinks Chauvin was righteous..good f'ing riddance.

I doubt much of that happens though.

I don't think anyone will suggest Chauvin was righteous...It is obvious he screwed up at some level...Murder most likely not...

originally posted by: Xtrozero

It is obvious he screwed up at some level...Murder most likely not...

Screwed up at some level?
You're unreal.
He was found guilty of second-degree unintentional murder because no other verdict was possible.
One is bound to ask, if it wasn't intentional, what was in the man's mind? We cannot know, still less prove, so we have to settle for second-degree.

I'm curious Xtrozero, can you point to a case where a police officer did, in your mind, commit second-degree murder? Or does that never happen, in your mind?

a reply to: matafuchs

Resisting Arrest. Passing counterfeit bills.

They killed him for passing what might have been a counterfeit $20 bill and crying for his mother. Such heinous crimes. Of course, this happens to white Americans every day, doesn't it?

If he would have gone to the police station he may have lived if not OD'd. He did not have to die man. At all.

If he'd been white, maybe.

This was a race killing.

a reply to: Astyanax

This was a race killing.

What's the evidence other than Chauvin being white and Floyd being black?